PlaneShift
Gameplay => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kaerli_Stronwylle on July 07, 2013, 03:04:36 am
-
So, it seems that there are some open questions as to just how powerful our characters should be from a RP standpoint...and some significant differences of opinion too, so I wanted to at least get a feel for where various folks were coming from.
-
It probably depends on the scenario the character's are in. I doubt anyone wants someone who can't take rats going out on a hunt with them. And your expertise level in a trade might not have any bearing on combat skills.
-
It really depends. I don't think it should ever go past high powered. But a char who can handle their own is fine. I personally favor the under powered, as it makes things more interesting. Charging someone head on in a tavern because you have the ability to fight is boring. But going around their backs and ruining their reputation? That is fun.
-
But going around their backs and ruining their reputation? That is fun.
+1 <3
I didn't vote as there was no option that said "I don't care", or "It depends."
If you mean stats, then enough that I can conveniently carry whatever stuff I need and travel liberally without having to keep stopping and taking breaks along the way. Rolling a knight has satisfied this for the most part. If I'm going to give stuff away, then I need at least one character for looting and generating tria.
It also depends on who you are playing with. If fellow role players have an expectation that you match trained skills with RP skills, then some training is needed to match the character. I dislike this very much in PS for multiple reasons. I would rather just declare some reasonable stats and then just play with those without changing them. If increasing skills is a part of the rp ( ie. a long term quest or something) , then fine.
What is reasonable? Again, it depends on the character. I'm really not a fan of over powered characters because it leads to immature play and impossible scenarios - and immature players. I would rather play with someone who takes damage and accepts their character's weaknesses as to do so takes a certain level of maturity and detachment.
-
I'm also not going to vote.
I don't care about a character's abilities (unless I am working on an RP that requires someone with a specific skill or lack of skill in order for it to be realistic), what I care about is HOW the roleplayer handles the skills.
For example, if you want to RP as a high level master mage, that's fine. But if you walk up to me and type "/me waves his arms and causes Taya to die screaming in a giant fireball." I'm just going to sort of sit there and laugh at you. On the other hand, if you play a mage who you say is high level in everything, but then RP that the magic has affected his mind to the point where he's not in touch with the world, so often doesn't see if someone's about to stab him in the back, then this can be interesting (assuming of course that the RPer is mature enough to let those sneak attacks work and so on.)
Another point is that I don't think the power level is really all that relevant for 'normal' in town RPs. I could be playing as a master in a way, adept in others, who is also an excellent armour maker, blacksmith, cook, fist fighter, knife thrower, professional rivnak racer and... you'd never ever know - unless of course my character was inclined to wave these facts in your face every few minutes.
And that's the real point I think I want to make. Relying too heavily on what your characters skills are for RP can be boring and off-putting for others. On several occasions I've tried RPing a very weak or a very disadvantaged character only to have "oh just train until you can hunt trepors then you'll be fine" thrown in my face. And that's boring, since it's like saying "everyone can be powerful and kill things" whereas I like RP that accommodates characters of any ability.
-
I like to think characters that are obviously OP have retard strength and treat them as if they are mentally challenged.
-
The thing is characters are not strong or weak, they have strengths and weaknesses that are subject to change. People who choose to play extremely strong characters all the time have a problem understanding this. If you go around playing "the strongest fighter" or "the best ranger" your character herself is an act of godmodding. You impose your character as stronger than anyone else and starting a RP on those terms is outright rude to the other players.
There are characters of weak, medium or even extreme strengths but these things are determined by the quality of one's roleplay. In my experience you can't really decide beforehand the strengths of your character, these things are determined by the people you meet. You may have people accept your character's strength but have it prooved he is not so smart in the end. If that happens you can't be like "no, he's smart too".
Just because game characters have a level it doesn't mean its normally like this. On the contrary, while roleplaying we have a chance to throw away all power levels and allow skilled swordsmen bite some dirt and clumsy youngsters make an improbable kill, all for the sake of an interesting story.
-
I believe the diversity is the most probable attribute of people you meet in a roleplay; but the distribution will have a peak at the average. Ask C.F. Gauss about it.
-
I'm kind of confused by the question. Is it asking what actual numerical stats the other character has, or what the player acts like the character's stats are?
-
I agree with others. Diversity and realism withing the settings are more important than any specific range of abilities and attributes.
-
I too did not vote, for an ingame reason and for what I think of as a meta-reason.
IG, the quality of the rp is what matters to me. IF for the purpose of the rp, the character says they "are" something, and something reasonable within the worldview of Yliakum, then ok by me. "Stupid as a stone" in the character "eye"D matters not if the character is interesting, fully formed. Two quick examples: Roled met a person- seemingly new, or maybe an alt- no stats. However we had a fine, deep, surprising conversation, that forwarded RR's character by the questions she asked him. Hopefully the same happened for the character he shared a meal with in Kada Els. Second example, in the Gofis plot that seems to be having an inclusive and growing life of it's own, yeah! \\o// one character says he's a certain rank, a certain job, attendant with the pomp and circumstance that position might afford. OK by me! It's like live rp improv- believe it, say yes, carry forward, be real enough and stretch the story enough.
The meta observation, and I wonder how prevalent this is, is that since our numbers are woefully down, there are often times when the only things to do really are hunt, train, mine, craft, or talk on gossip. Maybe we don't have a lot of time, and don't want to rp just to leave quickly and leave others in the learch. Maybe we just got off a shootty day at work and are ooc crankypants. Anyway, there are reasons to train and level that are ig and reasons that are ooc. For those of us whose characters are not interested in actual pvp fights (RR has only deliberately fought another character maybe 3 times in 5 years?) stats are simply insignificant. It is seldom RR flaunts his actual stats magick skills ( altho recently for rp purposes he got annoyed enough to flaunt) because RR simply isn't interested in fighting and his player isn't interested in rps that revolve around pvp stat challenges.
That's idiosyncratic. I am NOT saying that every player should hold the underlying value system and bias that I, and to a different extent Roled, hold- that is the freedom of this kind of mmorpg character development. I am only saying that, for me as RR's player, stats are a personal player achievement, it's fun to cast heavy duty magick and take down vilenauts, but except for defense of the weak and stopping evils in their rp tracks (if pvp becomes involved) RR isn't interested in if he's stronger or weaker than you.
Long, thanks for the chance to be thoughtful about this.
:sorcerer:
-
Another non-vote here ...
I am not a good RPer, though I do try. However, the stats and or skills of others has never occurred to me to be important unless we are hunting together, or something of this nature. I think what Gilrond said, "diversity and realism" are what makes RP interesting.
:sorcerer:
-
is it a sport not going to vote anymore? :P
oh well I'll pick up all your vote rights and use them as I see fit :devil:
-
So far, the result is quite normally distributed, with the expectable extreme troll vote. ;)
-
I know who voted the last option: it wasn't me, and they weren't trolling. I'm just saying <w<
-
My main falls into medium at least, if not somewhat on the high end. There have been moments of grinding in the character's early development yet she is slowly getting stronger through activities that appear, to me at least, to be ic. If some of one's activity in the game is using the mechanics it's bound ta happen. :)
- Nova
[edit : typo]
-
I also abstain.
First off, the poll is unfair in that we can only pick one option. I prefer anything from very low to high as long as it's well-played. After all, the mechanics don't quite match what the setting says; even the weakest of 'Nauts are supposed to be something of a 'boss' mob. It's unrealistic to have a character that can just take on an Ulber with just their blade - even with magic it's questionable; a mage would probably be too old for that nonsense by the time he mastered his Way. Even a master warrior/battlemage as mentioned in 'very high' would probably just fall under the higher end of the 'high' category.
-
a mage would probably be too old for that nonsense by the time he mastered his Way.
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/Ain-t-Nobody-Got-Time-Fo-Dat-sweet-brown-31241125-480-330.jpg)
-
After all, the mechanics don't quite match what the setting says; even the weakest of 'Nauts are supposed to be something of a 'boss' mob. It's unrealistic to have a character that can just take on an Ulber with just their blade
No it is not unrealistic, if we wanted to go that way we would have achieved it by setting NPCs stats to something unachievable by players.
-
Her feline shape blended among the tall, dry grass. Her tail rested on the ground, quiet, as she fiddled with a long, slender blade. Ulbernaut furs were rather appreciated, and she knew she could make a living out of it. Standing upwind, she waited for one of those big beasts to approach her, even though she wasn't alone: a few yards away, a companion waited, flexing his legs' muscles to get ready and jump on the beast's back to distract it.
As soon as the big pile of fur and bones got close enough, the male darted off at the highest speed he could, reaching out with his claws to cling onto the beast's chest, knowing he wouldn't get hit easily there. The female, limber and lighter, quickly jumped up the ulbernaut's back, looking for the base of its skull and sinking the slender blade deep into its spinal cord, to which the beast responded with a sudden spasm and some quiet growl. The male made sure to skitter away before the weight of the beast crushed him against the ground, observing how the female used her weight to guide the ulbernaut forward.
And these two are plain Enkidukai hunters. You're telling me they can't kill an ulber?
-
Venorel looses one last bolt into the magnificent ball of fur. There is a gurgling from the great beasts throat. It flounders in the tree branches it is passing beneath and then falls with a thud which shakes the ground below Venorel's feet. She draws her Knife of the Hammer and approaches the felled beast.
-
Opps mistaken double post. My bad.
-
Nooooot voting. I don't know how many people play video games outside of planeshift, but here is a nerdy metaphor. There is a difference between a "Survival" game and a "Shoot em up" game. I feel that a lot of people are too hyped up from the ability to take out twenty-to-one baddies and then leap into the planeshift world thinking that they're going to be some incredible version of that dude from Uncharted.
No. Wrong way of thinking. Instead, think of it as survival. The most recent comparison I can think of is Last of Us, though there are doubtlessly far better. It ain't always the best idea to run at an enemy or group of enemies fighting. Sometimes it's better to hide. Sometimes it's better to dodge or avoid. Sometimes it's better to be smart about something! Sneak up behind, as it were.
Obviously there are numerous flaws in implementing what's strictly a mechanical one on one with dealing with other players. For instance, you don't get to decide alone if the person you're trying to trick gets to hear you or not. And indeed, I've encountered few people willing to actually let something like that happen, even if it's plausible in certain situations. A lot of it ties back to folks who are unwilling to get hurt and die. But when you think about it, role playing the recovery of such an event and heck, even forming a mob of your buddies to get back at the person is just as fun (moreso for me) than "winning" in some all out fight.
I also think this pole is far too one-dimensional. Fighters have strengths and weaknesses. When your character becomes nigh on unbeatable and cannot be overwhelmed no matter what technique is used, it's an issue, and less people are going to want to engage it. Less people are going to want to Role Play with you. And thus, you aren't satisfied either.
That said, there is no real formula for role playing fights. I've had some awesome ones and I've had some terrible ones. It's a tough thing to master [cough impossible cough], and you'll find no matter what that more often than not, if you're trying to teach someone something, you're going to have to give more than take in the veritable in character battle. More often than not, I die, but I don't see that as a loss. It can be taken to a whole other level after that.
I never role played with Sarras much, but I did observe that even though her character had very high stats, it certainly wasn't nigh on unbeatable. It even made "human" mistakes, if you will, that weren't necessarily extraordinary but believable in a fight. Teshia is probably the best at this. Not only did she screw up, let her character get wounded or killed, she even adopted a casual posture or air when she knew the bad guy was being mobbed to death by ten+ "heros" all casting fists of volcano at his/her face simultaneously.
Going back to what I said before, it is vital to give your character exploitable weaknesses. That does not, of course, mean that your character needs to be weak. Finding the middle ground between being glaringly obvious about them and so subtle they may as well not exist can be hard as well (I tend to fall towards the former admittedly) can be tough, but I also find it fun to plan out the inconsistency in a fighting technique. I think racial weaknesses should also be taken more advantage of: Klyros having hollow bones, nolthrir sensitivity to red way, stabbing a ynnwn with a silver dagger. Think about it, how much more fun would it be to burn the shape of some ornament into some looming red dude's cheek than typing /me casts HOLY EPIC BOLT OF DESTROY ALL EVULZ 100 times?
Cooperation is really key in a fight. As in reality, you win some, and you lose some. One simply needs to be more open minded about how the fight goes down.
tl;dr: Be creative when you fight, make strengths and weaknesses for characters, and sometimes, spreading insidious mob-forming gossip is more fun than an all out brawl.
My favorite statement about fight-style role play was made by Aramara: "It doesn't matter if I win. If the other players participating did not enjoy themselves, then I have lost."
-
I think some folks get the idea that their character should be able to take on 5 or 10 other characters like
this guy in white. That works in stories when the author is seeking to make some sort of glorious character
to center his story around but sadly, that only leads to squabbles and fights in RP.
In writing, we would call these guys in black "two dimensional characters" ( like carboard cut-outs) if we
considered them to be characters at all. Hell, in this scene, they are nothing more than punching bags for
the glorification of the protagonist. (guy in white) This doesn't work that easily in multi-player RP where each
character actually matters.
(http://pauldotcom.com//kungfu.jpg)
Above, Shao Lin Kung Fu Master Xi Mai Peng
demolishes a small crowd of emaciated insurance
salesmen. Too bad they didn't know how to fight. :)
-
I think some folks get the idea that their character should be able to take on 5 or 10 other characters like this guy in white. That works in stories when the author is seeking to make some sort of glorious character to center his story around but sadly, that only leads to squabbles and fights in RP.
In writing, we would call these guys in black "two dimensional characters" ( like carboard cut-outs) if we considered them to be characters at all. Hell, in this scene, they are nothing more than punching bags for the glorification of the protagonist. (guy in white) This doesn't work that easily in multi-player RP where each character actually matters.
So, we're comparing RP in PS to the opus of George R. R. Martin: "Everyone dies, the end".
-
Before we perma every character but one on PS, it should be mentioned that the comparisons were means by which a very large prey could be taken down by hunters. :)
- Nova
-
I think some folks get the idea that their character should be able to take on 5 or 10 other characters like this guy in white. That works in stories when the author is seeking to make some sort of glorious character to center his story around but sadly, that only leads to squabbles and fights in RP.
In writing, we would call these guys in black "two dimensional characters" ( like carboard cut-outs) if we considered them to be characters at all. Hell, in this scene, they are nothing more than punching bags for the glorification of the protagonist. (guy in white) This doesn't work that easily in multi-player RP where each character actually matters.
So, we're comparing RP in PS to the opus of George R. R. Martin: "Everyone dies, the end".
No, it's just exceedingly unrealistic to take out twenty people with nothing but your AMAZING POWERS ERMG because your character is Bruce Lee. ;D Having a whole group of folks with such a similar mindset doesn't lead to a good time or helpful interaction between characters because inevitably: "But MY character is the awesomest because he's the bestest axe-wielding/magic master-all slinging/age old prince blessed by all them gods to defeat ALLLLLLL THE BADNESSSSSS!!!"
Not really conducive. :P
-
From observation only, it seems to be those with less mechanic developed characters which demean those that have done some grinding and rarely if ever the other way round.
It's almost like two games to some way of thinking. Kinda like visiting the shared BoT guild house when in Oja some time ago. If one of the members from the other guild entered we were just to ignore them as they were supposed to be in another house or something bizarre like that. Burying one's head in digital reality might be a good term for it.
- Nova
-
From observation only, it seems to be those with less mechanic developed characters which demean those that have done some grinding and rarely if ever the other way round.
Who is bashing grinding? Heck, if you like to grind, who cares! Different things float different people's boats. I've seen unground and ground characters alike do the whole over-powered thing. Myself included on some early occasions! I'd probably train mechanically more, I just don't have the patience. Terribly short attention span. I don't even want to talk about the number of hours it took to get my character Mariana's levels to where they are.
This is also a false assumption. I've seem some ground characters often refuse to accept the "abilities" of unground characters, even if they've been around for years and slowly tried to develop them over time. Because they did not spend said time grinding. Now, if people prefer mechanical backup, I've also seen a lot of folks come to a perfectly agreeable compromise. But the fact of the matter is that different folks have different interests in PlaneShift, and neither of them is "better" than the other. The mechanical is a part of the game, and so is role playing. Some folks mix the two, some separate them, what matters in the end is that everyone has a little fun.
Sorry if this was meant as a general statement. I was just puzzled as to where it fit in with the flow of the conversation.
-
Sorry if this was meant as a general statement.
It was pretty general yet point taken.
- Nova
-
Since in this game leveling is so grueling and people can't be bothered to do it for every character, I like to ignore other characters' levels. Rather, I go by my own observations of the character and the player. Such as, does the player want his character's abilities to match the skills he earned mechanically? Or has he not had the time to level up, and should I assume his character is stronger than the game tells me he is? Usually a good player will make this obvious. I also estimate the character's abilities based on the player's knowledge of combat.
When a player relies solely on mechanics, fights might be in the form of duels (/challenge), as they might not feel comfortable roleplaying a fight. I actually prefer this when a player isn't so knowledgeable regarding real combat. It's an insult to me, as a player, when someone tries to fight my character and pulls unrealistic moves on mine.
I appreciate when other players take the time to learn about their characters before throwing them into combat. The roleplay in this game is very detailed, and you have to play smart to win (unless you want to lose or don't care). You have to know your character's abilities, their weaknesses, and you need to know at least a few basic things about fighting.
I used to get this a lot: "You can't swing a longsword with one hand." There is so much false information floating around about medieval weapons that most people jump on what they see as incorrect and ruin the flow of roleplay with their ignorance. Longswords, even claymores, could be handled with one hand (don't assume I mean you could wield two at once--that would be awkward). The idea that swords were cumbersome is a misconception spawned from overly heroic depictions of knights and warriors and incorrect (boring) handling in movies and TV shows.
My point is, there is so much the common modern person doesn't know about how fighting was or is that, in order to have fun roleplaying, we should educate ourselves before pretending to be what we're not.
And then there's common sense. Your character is not invincible (unless that's part of the plot). Your character, even if a master of whatever, still has a chance of being bested by someone with less skill. In fact, your character should make a few mistakes, at least one catastrophic. There is a character out there whose player claims she is defeatable, but only if you are able to discover her one weakness. If I remember correctly, it's something like... if you surround her and attack her all at once, you'll defeat her. Obviously, since that applies to everyone. But that's her Achilles' heel. So, her invincibility is excused one-on-one. Makes no sense, right?
Mariana mentioned my character Sarras (and referred to her as an "it", luls). Sarras has been a martial artist for most of her life. Yet, most of the times she's in a fight, she completely messes up, and someone else is horribly injured or killed. I go in to most fights thinking she's going to get killed herself, and somehow it's never happened (probably because she's utterly ridiculous). The reason for all of this is I like to keep people entertained, and it's easy to do with a flawed character. Sarras is on the extreme end of flawed, though. Other players don't need to go that far. ;P
-
Mariana mentioned my character Sarras (and referred to her as an "it", luls).
Yeeeaaaah...I didn't word that very well. But I was trying not to get "Sarras" she mixed up with "Volki" she since I was talking about something you were doing well, not the character. ;D Sorry.
-
no
-
I voted for medium strength. Here's why.
This is not proscription, just observation based on years of play. This is the balance I think works best to keep Mary Suedom in check but let us have tons of fun. Also, when I say expert, or master, or average, I'm noting discernible levels of experience, skill, ability and talent among the various aspects of life in the game.
New characters should usually start out as average with potential. Usually, not always. Why? Because 90% of the fun lies in the journey. Take my first character. His first combat experience was against Unar. If you don't know who Unar is, let's just say that she was the greatest bounty hunter ever seen in the game. Hands down. I am not exaggerating. Although it was a different play-style then, I'll admit. My Ylian was obliterated. I learned. I became her apprentice, of sorts. It built gradually from there. And it was a blast. Scraping for trias, building skills, fighting as a mercenary, and doing tavern RP for a couple hours a day sometimes. Amazing gaming experience. There's my anecdotal evidence.
There ought to be masters, but they should only be a small proportion of the population. Mastery is lifelong, and becomes an art form almost always. It consumes vast amounts of time, so much so that other skills, talents and aspects of life are left wanting. That is the sacrifice. Unless your character is blessed by the gods with exceptionally long life or supreme talent, then this remains the way it is. Let me say, for a second, that you might think this a 'realism' argument -- but its not. I am using a fact of our lives, and noting its usefulness and importance in a role-playing community as a measure of fun in achievement and keeping a lid on Mary Sue explosions. These explosions happen, and they ruin fun. (See argument: extremes suck).
I used to believe matching mechanics (i.e an actual 100 dagger) with RP stats was the best most balanced route. Then I realized I had a life, and so did everyone else -- thus it doesn't work that way usually. Although I used to enjoy building skills, now I don't do it at all, almost entirely because of how much time my studies consume. I want to login, role-play, have a bunch of fun, and bounce out. I believe this is the case for most of us.
I swear, I'm not making a realism argument. I am taking realism and applying it here for the purpose of balance. There is a distinction. Oh, and I take no issue with making a super powerful character as long as its earned to a large extent and consented by those around you. A villain whose schemes sweep across the world would be an example where this could be fine.
P.S. Kull was my second character. He is three, possibly four haha, years old IRL. He started out average with potential, a fresh adult, and has become a powerful fighter. He earned that -- through role-play. He loses, and wins, and will likely die a true death within a year given his path. I'm not planning that -- it's just likely. So there you have it -- you can play a villain, who earns his power, have tons of fun, and be fine with him or her losing and eventually dying off.